The Bayview Condominium 2

The project is modest in scale by Pattaya standards. Two independent project profiles describe two seven-storey buildings arranged around shared facilities, while another profile describes a single building. With no primary document found to resolve that discrepancy, the building count is deliberately left out of the core registry fields. The rest of the physical profile is much more stable across sources. A small resident base can appeal to buyers who do not want a very large resort-style development, but size should not be treated as a proxy for management quality. In a project with only 33 units, the annual budget, sinking-fund position and history of special assessments deserve particular attention because major common-area costs are shared across a comparatively small ownership base.

The apartment stock is spacious relative to many newer mass-market condominiums in the city. Project profiles describe one-, two- and three-bedroom layouts and quote an overall usable-area band of 75–200 sqm. The resale evidence shows that this band is not a reliable hard ceiling. A current three-bedroom penthouse measures 250 sqm, while the transaction history includes a 192 sqm three-bedroom unit. A current two-bedroom listing measures 134.68 sqm and has three bathrooms. In practice, this is a building where the exact floor plan matters more than a generic project average: units differ enough in size and configuration that buyers should compare the actual title area, room arrangement, floor, outlook and renovation condition.

Asking prices are equally unit-specific. The lowest active asking-price anchor found in this review is THB 5.5 million for the 134.68 sqm two-bedroom, three-bathroom unit, offered under Thai ownership. At the other end of the current sample is a 250 sqm three-bedroom penthouse at THB 17.34 million, marketed as Foreign Quota. These are not like-for-like properties, so the difference should not be read as a simple project-wide price range. Size, floor, views, fit-out, legal ownership status and seller expectations all change the number. The THB 5.5 million figure is therefore only the lowest live asking-price reference found on 15 September 2026, not a promise that a foreign buyer can obtain an equivalent unit at that price.

Ownership needs to be checked at unit level. Thai condominium law allows foreign freehold ownership within the 49% foreign-ownership quota for the building, and the Thai government guidance notes that the condominium juristic person must confirm the foreign ownership proportion for registration. The live listings reviewed for this project illustrate why that distinction matters: the 250 sqm penthouse is marketed as Foreign Quota, whereas the 134.68 sqm unit is marketed under Thai ownership. A buyer should not assume that because one unit is eligible for foreign freehold, every resale in the building is. Before paying a reservation or deposit, the exact quota status and the documentation required for transfer should be confirmed for that specific title.

The location evidence is strong enough to identify the property without relying on a marketing map. The recorded address is 352/320 Phra Tamnak 4 Soi 2, Pattaya Tai, Pattaya, Chon Buri 20150, Thailand. Other project records confirm the Pratumnak / Phratamnak Soi 4 location and place the broader administrative area in Nong Prue, Bang Lamung, Chon Buri. Pratumnak Hill sits between central Pattaya and Jomtien, with access described via Phratamnak Road and Phratamnak Soi 4. No reliable latitude-and-longitude pair was exposed by the sources reviewed, so coordinates have not been invented or estimated for the registry.

The shared amenity list is consistent across several independent profiles: swimming pool, fitness room, sauna or steam room, garden, parking, 24-hour security, CCTV and key-card access. A common-area maintenance fee of THB 30 per sqm per month is also reported in more than one profile. For a resale decision, that number is best treated as a reference to verify with the condominium office rather than a permanently fixed charge. The more important due-diligence questions are whether common fees are current for the selected unit, whether any special assessments are outstanding, how the sinking fund is managed, and whether major systems or common areas have recently required substantial work.

The developer is the largest unresolved factual gap. The stronger project records either omit the original developer or show no developer information. One conflicting record attributes the project to “124 Privacy Condominium”, but that same record also gives basic characteristics that contradict the well-supported profile, including six floors and one unit instead of seven floors and 33 units. Without a primary source or a consistent independent chain, it is not responsible to present that name as the developer. For a completed 2009 resale building, the unknown original developer is not automatically a deal-breaker, but it shifts attention toward the current condominium juristic person, title documentation, debt-free confirmation, maintenance history and the building’s finances.

Overall, The Bayview Condominium 2 is best understood as a small established resale building where the quality of the specific unit matters more than a project-wide sales narrative. The main attractions are large layouts, a Pratumnak address and a low unit count. The trade-offs are equally tangible: the building is mature, the original developer remains unverified, sources disagree on the number of buildings, and some resale portals blur this project with the neighbouring 2007 Bay View property. It can make sense for a buyer who is comfortable assessing a resale unit one by one and wants more space than a typical new-build apartment. A buyer seeking a new project, a fully documented developer story and standardized purchase terms will probably find this a less straightforward fit.